The Blue Board

Alex Collins was 178-180-pounds as a junior. When we saw him at FSU camp in July he was up to 204-pounds. We wanted to see if he retained the speed, quickness, etc...with his 25-pound weight gain. And he certainly has. Even running more violent this year with the added weight/strength.

As I posted on BOL, I think RBs are the most difficult to evaluate and hence the most inaccurate. Todd Gurley is currently rated the #1 freshmen RB in terms of as an NFL Prospect and his final 2012 ranking is comparable to where Tyren is now. Gurley was a 3 star by most sites at this time last year and I think only 1 site had him ranked higher than Keith Marshall. Marshall enrolled early at UGA and Gurley still beat him out.

I was big on Gurley in the Summer/Fall of 2011 (feel free to search my old posts from that timeframe for "Todd Gurley").....and I think equally as highly of Tyren.

Doug Martin was a 2 star.....Ray Rice and Arian Foster were "low" 3 stars. Many 5 star RBs don't even end up playing in the NFL. Honestly, given that Tyren is already committed to Bama.....I see little benefit of him bring ranked higher [although I think he and Keith Ford are the best 2 RBs in the nation]. The perceived slight is good for motivation.

My argument was never based on a single player. It's based on the systematic under-rating of CA talent.

Honestly, what analysts do you have that are based in CA? Any? On the west coast?

This site (and others) shouldn't get defensive when it is pointed out that their rankings are flawed because they under-rate CA. And I get it - your subscriber base is in the southeast so you focus most of your analysis in that area. It's a business decision, but it is causing your rankings to be skewed.

Bias is a loaded word. Are you intentionally underrating CA? No, probably not.

However, I'm pretty sure that my assumption is right and that there are no analysts in CA or even on the west coast. If you have an entire area of the country that doesn't have an analyst covering them, the data is going to be skewed.

That's all I'm saying. It is a business decision to cater to the subscriber base in the SE. So there are a lot of analysts in that area. But because of that, the rankings in CA are lacking.

I'm going to be defensive if you level an unfair criticism. Which players do you take issue with or is this just some theory that you don't wish to back up? If you'd present facts or debate players, I'd be glad to discuss it, but if it's just something in your mind, then that's a different thing all together and I am not sure what that has to do with us.

Thanks JC. He was a guy that most of us thought Dantonio took to give MSU a possible dual threat look; no one was expecting him to go off this fall. I think he raised his completion % by 10+. Very glad he's committed to MSU. Appreciate the effort you guys put in to these things; hard to rank guys 1-10, let alone 1-247!

I second that.

I was hoping to see Channing Stribling move into the top247 with the year he had.

Taco Charlton had a solid year for a backup, 116 tackles 24 TFL 19 sacks.

You haven't even answered my question that is the crux of this argument. Do you, or do you not, have an analyst in California that has a hand in rating players? Is there even one on the West Coast at all?

If not, how can you be "intellectually honest" and believe that wouldn't skew the rankings?

And if you want facts, I can give you some that show specifically what I'm talking about.

CA produces more NFL talent than any other state. But... 24/7 only has 217 CA recruits ranked. Of those, only 35 are 4-star or better.

TX has 347 recruits ranked. 48 of them are 4-stars or better.
FL has 320 recruits ranked. 46 of them are 4-stars or better.

Why the disparity? Do you honestly believe that it is justified to have almost 60% more recruits ranked in TX than in CA? And 47% more recruits ranked in FL than in CA?

edit: because you wanted facts:

CA has 177 players rated 3-star or better
TX has 276 players rated 3-star or better
FL has 216 players rated 3-star or better

Again, why the disparity when CA produces the most NFL talent?

Yes we have Justin Hopkins and Barton Simmons that both work the West Coast for 247Sports.

If you can find some guys that we need to rank in California, I am all ears. It's about projecting players, not hitting quotas. If you can find players that we need to be on, hey we will take a look at them and go. Do I wish we had more California players ranked? Yes. But that does not make for a skewed Top247, does it? No. So again, what players from California do we not have ranked high enough to make our rankings "skewed"?

If the crux of your argument is that we need to rank more prospects from the Golden State, I am all for it.

Su'a Cravens drops to #11 I dont know why? he just won Cali gatorade player of the year.

I doubt they ever will, jc.

Most west coast homers just cry about it